I suspect some will fill balance holes but not completely. Or, with what?

That's exactly the type of comments from others I saw flying around the internet when the rule was first announced. I'm sure that it will happen. This rule relies too much on bowlers policing other bowlers and honesty/integrity. However, for entertainment value I would love to see someone's questionably filled balance hole break apart and send whatever they tried to use as filler flying all over the place.

A person only needs to have a PGA rule book from the 60's to compare with a rule book from 2018 to see how much integrity there is out there when 5 extra dollars are at stake :-)

Bowling is the same. For all the oversight that will get expended by USBC, a simple time-stamp next to an existing balance hole, by a reputable pro shops would have allowed all balls to be grandfathered in for nothing.

Thinking of a bell-curve, those who might be able to take advantage of the new rules are probably all at one end and why spend all the money to cheat when it only costs $10 to comply? LOL!

I hate to plug balls. I believe it just introduces a weakness in the ball that may lead to cracking due to different materials expanding and contracting. I have 2 Hy-roads and an Intense to plug first. And then there is my Yeah Baby a 14 year old ball with a P2 hole to plug just to comply with the new rules. So lets start adding here. That is 4 balls in my current 16lb arsenal. In my 15lb balls I have 7 balls that I have to plug. That's 12 balls @$10 a ball just to comply. I also have 4 oyher balls that won't need plugged. I just realized I got too many balls. 17

According to the USBC, a weight hole could be added to offset a one ounce static imbalance. However, drillers found by moving the hole or making it larger, it also change the differential RG, by as much as .021. This fundamentally changed the ball dynamics by adding more hook.

As of Jan1, 2020, the static weight difference allowed will be 3 ounces. And by Aug1, 2020, NO weight holes will be allowed in any ball. By changing the static weight limit and eliminating the weight hole, the USBC says their study shows most balls will reduce the hook for less back end.

so, it seems to me, what you want is a ball with a higher Differential RG then you currently have by .021 to get a similar reaction. But, I believe the limit is .06.

Most agree that a symmetrical ball hooks more then an asymmetrical in covering more boards. The difference is the hook shape, from an arc to a snap. Higher the Differential RG, the more the snap.

My experience is the same. High RG balls out-hook low RG balls, even if the low-RG ball has a more aggressive surface.

I have a Hy-Road and a Lock both drilled 50 x 5 x 50 and the Hy-Road hooks a lot more.

However, to get a ball to react quicker to friction, the VAL angle needs to be more acute. I wouldn't recommend a ball that flips unless the person throwing it can generate enough speed to keep it under control.

I'm not a high speed player. The ball reads the lane differently than everything else I own. Since I started using this ball exclusively, I've only had 4 games under 200 and 24 over 200. The ball motion has really helped a lot.

Rather than begging for donations we're asking you to do one simple thing to help keep these forums running smooth:
When shopping for anything on Amazon.com or eBay please use these links to go to the web sites.

This won't cost you a cent!

You'll still get the exact same low prices, deals and free or low cost shipping; it doesn't change anything for you at all! The items do not have to be bowling related; all purchases made through these links help us! Amazon.com and eBay will pay us a small commission for every sale and it's helping us cover the expenses.

BowlingFans.com, BowlingFans, The Right Approach, Kegler's Connection, Tour411, BallBeat, BowlingCommunity.com, BowlSearch.com, and Bowling News You Can Use are trademarks of usrbingeek LLC. All other trademarks and tradenames are property of their respective owners.